ZERO cheers for the Senate’s newest member spendthrift pig! After only 18 days in office, Senator Scott Brown has already sided with fellow New England Republicans embarrassments Susan Collins and Olympia Snow (along, this time, with pork-lover Kit Bond of Missouri) in voting to saddle us with yet another $15,000,000,000 in deficit spending.
That bloom is quickly fading.
For a man who was swept into office based on his self-described distaste for an out-of-control government recklessly spending our money, he is off to a very, VERY bad start.
I welcome you, as I have in past such instances to contact these Senators:
Kit Bond
Scott Brown (hopefully coming soon, phone number is (202) 224-4543)
Susan Collins
Olympia Snowe
For my part, I am looking right now at the thank-you letter I received just this week from Senator Brown for the donation I made to his campaign. I have choice words for him and will be formulating a reply over the next couple days.
-Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from HQ)
UPDATE My apologies. In my haste, I had missed that another Republican embarrassment George Voinovich is also responsible for the boondoggle with his “Yea” vote.
And by the way, YES, I prefer Brown to having Coakley in his stead. By now, Stalinized Health Care would already be the law of the land without him. And YES, I realize that his election was a shot across the bow at the socialist Democractic party and thier overreaches, and so in a sense he has already served that purpose (and nobly). But the rose-colored days ended on the day he was elected and he now has to be held responsible for how he performs his duties (sound familiar?). I treat him no better or worse than I do with the other robber-barons of the Republican party (see links in my original post above to see historical proof of this). It is a greater let-down considering I donated to him because of certain things that are still posted on his campaign website:
Why I’m Running… I want to ensure that we leave them an America that is financially stronger and independent: minus a national debt that we can never repay.
I have been a fiscal watchdog in the state legislature fighting bigger government, higher taxes and wasteful spending.
(Emphases mine)
These proclamations, now can clearly be seen in practice to have been only campaign rhetoric. And we’re the hypocrites the Lefties who troll our Comments section say we are if we don’t shine an especially harsh the light on the ones we support when they let us down.
Nick, I’m not sure what you expected. Brown was/is a Massachusetts Republican. He was misguided enough to support Romneycare.
Knocking out the Dems’ 60th vote in their own back yard, was always the point of supporting Brown. Mission accomplished.
Knocking out the Dems’ 60th vote in their own back yard, was always the point of supporting Brown. Mission accomplished.
Great, now instead he’ll be the guy we always have to please or he’ll walk over and make a deal with SnoCollins
We wanted a fresh face and got Joe Lieberman instead–a one issue Republican who may be lefty on everything else
Plus, it’s only another $ 15 billion… Gee, I remember when that sounded like a lot of money.
This was bipartisan. Why did the Republicans bail on it when they helped write it?
BTW: If Dianne Feinstein gets the water provision in the bill that will help the West Valley farmers, then I will support it too. If she doesn’t get this passed through the environmentalist nuts in her party, the West Side farmer is no more. Say hello to much higher prices for tomatoes and anything made with tomatoes, as we are a major source for that crop. And this is the time that the crop is planted. If farmers have to wait too long to know if they’ll have water, they lose the window to plant the crop and make any profit.
I’ll blog on this tomorrow.
You would rather Coakley held the seat today?
While I was disappointed by this, I wonder if Brown will be encouraged to do more or less of this sort of thing by the gloating headlines that followed his vote. The Democrats are only to happy to have him play Charlie Brown to their Lucy with the football. Maybe he’ll catch on to what’s going on–I hope he will, but if he’s just another SnowCollins Republican, that’s not great, but it’s still better than having another vote for ObamaCare.
Even before then, I noticed Brown’s record in terms of the fact that he had supported RomneyCare. I put more weight on his actions than the material on his web site. So my expectations of him were not so high, perhaps.
You would rather Coakley held the seat today?
Right now their voting record would be the same
I wouldn’t ditch him for this alone. At this point I’m still of the opinion that he is a s good as we had any right to expect.
From WSJ:
So he gives Republicans the finger and guts measures they helped add to it and calls it “bipartisanship”. What a colossal ass.
ColoradoPatriot,
Pay no attention to the comments from Nathan and ILoveCapitalism.
Contact Brown both by phone and in writing and let him know you are a campaign contributor who is none too pleased. That’s your right — and how else are politicians to learn?
Looks like I’ve got to call George Sonofavitch’s office too. 🙁
I’d call Sherrod Brown’s but what’s the point?
Why are you surprised? He’s a New England Republican and I expected nothing more from him than I do from Snowe & Collins. By all means, lay into him if you think it’ll help but don’t expect him to become a Southern Republican just because you want him to be. Brown has already done us a great service.
Getting your panties in a bunch over 15 billion dollars…. have you ever complained about the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan?
You’re a hysteric and a hypocrite – and there’s no reason for any one that reads you to think that you hold your beliefs sincerely.
Meh. It’s a relatively cheap purchase of “bipartisanship”. $15 billion probably won’t cover Obama’s 2012 bid.
It could be worse anyway. The original bill (crafted by Republicans, as SonicFrog points out) was $85 billion.
Levi (#15) throws down his gauntlet
Apparently, in the Levi world, nothing is to be challenged unless you complained about the cost of the war Iraq and Afghanistan. In fact, until you complain about the cost of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan…..
This is very helpful shorthand for Levi and for readers of GayPatriot.
Levi: “Have you ever complained about the cost of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan?”
Commenter: “No.”
Levi: “You’re a hysteric and a hypocrite – and there’s no reason for any one that reads you to think that you hold your beliefs sincerely.”
Easy, peasey lemon squeezey. Who said they don’t teach critical thinking in public schools across the land? Levi has created a formula that can not fail.
Levi’s still miffed that we have elections and his enlightened brotherhood can’t drag us kicking and screaming into his future.
I’d point out that defense is one of the functions of the Federal Government, but that would require understanding of the Constitution, something Levi’s demonstrated he chooses not to do.
Which of course is nonsense.
Too late.
Heliotrope –
I’m just trying to get an idea of what fiscal conservatism means. On one hand, you have no problem committing to spending trillions on a decades long war that has only diminished our security and credibility and is completely unjustifiable in every regard, but spending 15 billion IN the United States FOR American workers is a huge issue. That is supposed to make sense?
Suppose we were in a room together with a large pile of money. You insisted that the only smart thing to do with the money was to burn it, literally, with fire, as fast as we could. I ask if I can have five bucks to buy lunch, and in response you scold me for being reckless and irresponsible with money. That’s what complaining about the jobs bill is like if you’ve never been bothered with our spending in Iraq.
Would 1 billion be too much for a government to spend to try to get its people back to work? How about half a billion? What would you have the government do? That’s rhetorical, obviously. I know you don’t want the government to do anything that doesn’t involve cutting taxes.
Levi,
I know this will hurt your brain, but please try reading the Constitution. Work with the big words and tell me where the Government is authorized to take my money and give it to someone else to put them to work.
I’ll even help. Your complaints about Iraq and Afganistan (anyone notice how Levi now is condemining Afghanistan when he was supporting us shelling Pakistan not that long ago?) have no merit.
“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;”
“To establish Post Offices and post Roads;”
“To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations;”
Now, please explain to me how spending on the ‘War on Poverty’ (funny how Levi doesn’t want to withdraw from that multibillio dollar fiasco) or this latest porkulus program is constitutional. I’m sure in your 26 years of life you have found the answer.
Or are you too busy plotting how to drag us to your facist brownshirt future to come up with an answer?
“spending trillions” oh really? I think you are mistaken.
surely a war on poverty could be justified constitutionally as pertaining to the ‘general welfare’ of at least part of the population? or as ‘common defence’ amongst the states against poverty?
also, would i be correct in thinking that readers of this blog who are angry at browns vote do not want extra spending to be legislated by congress except if it military spending?
Livewire –
It says it right there… “provide for the common defence and general welfare of the united states.” It shouldn’t take too much of an imagination to figure out how a jobs bill in a recession does both of those things. General welfare is a very broad category, and it certainly includes doing things like this.
Maybe you could point me to the part of the constitution where it says we are allowed to invade foreign countries?
It shouldn’t take too much of an imagination to figure out how a jobs bill in a recession does both of those things.
The entertaining thing about this is that, if Levi could actually think beyond his leftist talking points, he might realize a) just how many people the military employs directly and b) just how much money is spent with US companies and US contractors equipping, feeding, clothing, housing, and otherwise supporting the military.
In short, military spending CLEARLY provides for “the common defence and welfare”. But Levi and his fellow leftists not only want military spending removed, they want the military disbanded.
Furthermore, Mary Katherine Ham has a wonderful example today of what Levi and his fellow Marxists are doing.
I like how she put it:
You are already paying a 24-year-old, able-bodied, college graduate a $2,500* monthly stipend to organize tenants as part of Americorps (a service that should be donor-supported, but Constitutional objections aside…). You are paying more than $5,000 toward his education, as a reward for his “volunteer” work with Americorps. You are subsidizing his student loan forgiveness, as a condition of his volunteer work in this government program. You are now paying for his food, even though he himself thinks the money should probably go to those less fortunate than himself.
This is Levi in a nutshell. He screams and wets himself about how there’s not enough money going to “the poor”, demands that the rest of us who work and pay taxes pay even more to support them, helps himself to the additional funds, and then repeats the process.
“The poor” are nothing but a convenient excuse for the Obama Party and people like Levi. In fact, Levi has no vested interest in helping “the poor”, because the fewer poor there are, the less leverage he has to demand handouts.
Common defense Levi.
So, in Levi world we can take all of Levi’s earnings and give them to me under the General Welfare? Cool.
Hint, General Welfare is not the checks you collect every month, it’s the functioning of the federal government, not making sure you get your unemployment check.
Again, Levi fails basic government.
And let’s show another example of how Levi wants to send $11 BILLION dollars to fund clinics that teach underage children how to dodge statutory rape and parental consent laws.
Then again, Barack Obama and Levi need people who will give abortions and birth control pills to underage minors, no questions asked. It’s this little preference they have.
livewire, your response doesn’t even make sense. who cares if defense is one of the few explicit functions of federal government? levi asks a question about the propriety of increasing the deficit to fight two wars. that’s a totally different issue than the legitimate functions of the federal government.
the fact that the constitution permit the federal government to provide for the defense of the country doesn’t justify deficit spending. defense spending is still spending.
and if you and nd30 are so convinced that the job bill is (clearly!!) unconstitutional, file a lawsuit after it goes into effect. just keep of us all posted on the outcome, ok?
bob, er chad.
Levi’s babbling aside, he is complaining about the government doing what it is allowed to do, while complaining that we don’t want it to do something that it’s not allowed to do. I just thought it would be a good chance to demonstrate that again Levi doesn’t know, or care about the law of the land, like any other fascist.
That he was clever enough to argue the government should be allowed to take all his money was icing on the cake.
I try not to give advice, but maybe endorsing someone else’s advice is enough of a distinction to get away with.
I agree with Coloradopatriot’s advice completely. Letting Brown know what you expect for your support will keep him from taking conservatives for granted. I just don’t think it does any good to write him off entirely at this point.
Hint, General Welfare is not the checks you collect every month, it’s the functioning of the federal government, not making sure you get your unemployment check.
So if the Constitution doesn’t say anything about unemployment, that mean the government can’t do anything about unemployment?
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
The ‘general welfare of the United States’ is an intentionally vague and generic statement designed so that the government can pass laws as needed from time to time. If we’re talking about what constitutes a healthy country, what contributes to the general welfare of a nation, it is impossible to argue that a strong economy with a high employment rate is not an important characteristic. Therefore, passing a bill to provide jobs and a social safety net during a recession is undoubtedly a measure that contributes to the general welfare of the country.
This is what is so stupid about conservatism. You guys have become so mindlessly anti-government that you really don’t understand what you’re saying. With the ‘reasoning’ you’re presenting, it’s unconstitutional to pass any laws at all.
Levi’s babbling aside, he is complaining about the government doing what it is allowed to do, while complaining that we don’t want it to do something that it’s not allowed to do.
Could you explain how your argument is not “The government is not allowed to pass laws.” And again, where does the Constitution give the President the power to torture people unilaterally and invade foreign countries unprovoked?
Therefore, passing a bill to provide jobs and a social safety net during a recession is undoubtedly a measure that contributes to the general welfare of the country.
Not really.
You see, Levi, what you don’t understand is that the government does not generate revenue; it can only take it from others.
In short, that $15 billion has to come from other people. The $15 billion taken from other people is lost to them; as a result, they cannot use it to hire more people, buy more products and services (which would put others to work), or invest in capital improvements (which would put others to work).
There is very straightforward research that a a tax increase of 1% of GDP lowers real GDP by 3%, drops personal consumption 2.6%, decreases domestic investment by 12.6% and causes an increase of over 1% in unemployment.
In short, your taking money from others INCREASES unemployment, not decreases it. How is it “helping the general welfare” to put more people out of work so you can have fatter checks, Levi?
Dear Levi.
See the 10th ammendment.
You are the exact reason we had to write it down rather than trust it being assumed.
While you’re at it, please read 1-9
Sincerely,
The Founding Fathers.
PS.
Levi, the only people accusing the givernment of torture is left wing folks like yourself. Two administrations have clearly said no it’s not torture.
But since you want to drag people kicking and screaming where they don’t want to go, how is that different?
You also have said that President Bush allowed 9/11 to happen. And that President Al Gore wouldn’t have. Of course you never explained how the official court certified fraud would have mystically stopped 9/11 when as VP he didn’t offer any answers for every other bit of terrorism on the way.
Maybe President Obama would have been able to stop the Pentagon bombing… Oh wait, that was in the 60’s, and he didn’t have his good friend Bill Ayers on Speed Dial yet.
I’m not at all interested in chatting with Levi about his silliness in #20 and here is why:
What a tiresome slog it would be to play words and reason with just ONE sentence that is chock-a-block full of rabid opinion and no substance.
To quote Levi:
Scott Brown blew it. This was his opportunity to show that he is the fiscal conservative that he campaigned to be. He has betrayed the confidence of those who voted for him. This is analogous to Bush 41´s ¨Read my lips.¨
I just love the people who arte in favor of a permanent ‘pure’ 35 vote senate minority. Just sayin’